Arduino envy at Microchip

Go To Last Post
95 posts / 0 new

Pages

Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I just read the following on SparkFun:

Quote:
I have a lot of meetings with potential part vendors, and none of them understand Arduino. I don't think anyone does, but I did have a meeting the other week that surprised me. Microchip wanted to meet with us because they were interested in creating an 'Arduino' like board using a PIC processor. Microchip finally began to understand what it means to get people early, and using their hardware, and Microchip was sensing (rightfully) that they were loosing market to this thing called Arduino.

Arduino is causing the world to use and learn AVRs. As much as I resisted, I learned ATmegas because Arduino hardware forced me to learn. I now love ATmegas. And if Atmel was smart, they would give Arduino all the free ATmega328s they could possibly want. Check out that graph!


http://sparkfun.com/commerce/new...

I particularly like the statement:

Quote:
...none of them understand Arduino. I don't think anyone does...
Finally someone has explained the Arduino!

So let the Arduino hater's and PIC lover (singular since Leon is the only one here) have at it.

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I'm also a PIC user (16-bit dsPIC/PIC24 "lover" and 8-bit PIC "hater") so please correct your singular :D

Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I despise the Arduino development platform but take advantage of the cheap hardware sometimes. Not the official stuff which is way over-priced but the 3rd party boards. Specially the m128/m256 ones which give easy header access to those QFP pins for $10-$20.

Arduino itself has limited access to pins and insulates users from true AVR architecture. The bootloader is a pig too. Better to stick with Winavr and ISP on Arduino PCBs.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

So, Smiley, how about a book which leads the casual Arduino user to become a bona fide AVR programmer? I know your articles are working toward this end, but you could gather it all together.

Chuck Baird

"I wish I were dumber so I could be more certain about my opinions. It looks fun." -- Scott Adams

http://www.cbaird.org

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

johnwarfin wrote:
I despise the Arduino development platform ...
And this is THE THING - such emotion over a tool. I've noted several folks who generally seem reasoned in their thread responses except when it comes to Arduino, then they get emotive. And I think there is a key point here - this thing really pisses folks off so it has got to have something going for it. There seems to be some sort of existential panic that infects experienced engineers when they hear about the Arduino. I certainly felt that way for the first few months after I heard about it. I literally wanted to kill it if at all possible, then one day - BOOM - I just relaxed and accepted it as a fact of life.

Some folks seem to want to rip my throat out because I'm now saying that getting started with the Arduino won't do any long-term damage, but then I even believe that folks that start with PICs can be salvaged - so I guess I'm a liberal of sorts.

zbaird wrote:
So, Smiley, how about a book which leads the casual Arduino user to become a bona fide AVR programmer? I know your articles are working toward this end, but you could gather it all together.
Great idea! And I just finished editing the first draft today. Like minds and all that.

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:
So, Smiley, how about a book which leads the casual Arduino user to become a bona fide AVR programmer? I know your articles are working toward this end, but you could gather it all together.

I actually subscribed to N & V just for the smiley AVR articles prior to the Arduino ones. Not that I have any problem with the Arduino, I started on one.

There seems to be very few AVR books but a nice variety for PIC. I think a book like that would do relatively well.

Edit: and before I clicked "Submit" the books done :)

Self proclaimed Captain Link

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:
I just finished editing the first draft today

Great! Let me know if there's anything I can do to help out.

Chuck Baird

"I wish I were dumber so I could be more certain about my opinions. It looks fun." -- Scott Adams

http://www.cbaird.org

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

One has to be a little suspicious of the Sparkfun reference. Microchip planted itself into the hearts and minds of experimenters worldwide via the Basic Stamp(c) as well as providing free tools (albeit an assmebler initially). The reality is that whilst it is nice to have a well known product, Microchip don't make their millions selling to experimenters, nor do Atmel (Parallax has done quite well - but they do quite a value add). There's the stories of certain experimenters making a product using brand X processors that sell millions (Furby??) but that doesn't happen too often.

Atmel got me on board with the AVR because they made the first ones pin compatible with the 8051s I was using and the AVR was much faster and had on chip eeprom. I didn't care less about the architecture as long as there were tools for it. Imagecraft had some good tools at the right price so that's what I still use. I'd been using AVRs for over four years before I found AVRFreaks.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Kartman wrote:
One has to be a little suspicious of the Sparkfun reference. Microchip planted itself into the hearts and minds of experimenters worldwide via the Basic Stamp(c) as well as providing free tools (albeit an assmebler initially).
Two things, first I may be naive but I tend to believe Nate at SparkFun - he seems like a fun and honest kind of guy. Two, Parallax did the Basic Stamp(c) and while I'm sure Microchip appreciates the buzz it generated, I don't think they have anything comparable in their arsenal. But anyway, it is all shuck and jive until it is in peoples hands so who know?

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

To me, the Arduino development environment and tools has a very "windows-ish"
feel to it. By that I mean that it works just well enough to seduce you into
believing that it actually really works.

One thing that it does do kind of like the PC and Microsoft Windows, is provide a kind of base platform
and method for many people to make money off it by selling lots of tiny little "low cost" components
to less technical savvy users. Whether it be books, hardware platforms or tiny projects.

Capitalism has funny way of determining which products succeed. Many times it isn't the best technology products that win.

======

A bit of a rant on arduino......

Some of their design and implementation choices for the IDE and the low level wiring API were rather unfortunate and they are starting to run into limitations that are not going to be easy to resolve.
Little things like if you want to write a library that needs to flip i/o lines in an interrupt handler, like when talking to a servo, or doing sofware PWM, or say an interrupt driven s/w UART, then the library's i/o lines can potentially be corrupted by the main programs calls to digitalWrite().

This is because of the way the low level wiring code works.
It does not ensure that port i/o operations are atomic. The code uses multiple table lookups and then does memory accesses to or/and i/o bits. Not only is this a very slow method but since the AVR is a RISC it is an interruptable operation.
Because of this, if a program ... er sketch uses the digitalWrite() function, it can corrupt i/o register bits that are being altered in an interrupt routine used by library code.
There is no fix to this that can be done in the library code. It takes fixing the low level wiring calls.

To me, this means that the low level wiring API functionally does not work, since if you lean on it by using interrupts, it falls down and breaks.

What is tragic is that while stuff like this has been pointed out in the arduino issue list, it isn't being perceived as being very high priority on the things to be fixed.
This means things like the interrupt driven servo library will have problems.
The average arduino user will probably blame the servo library rather than the low level arduino code since it is fairly counter intuitive how a simple digitalWrite() call to manipulate one pin could corrupt another pin.

--- bill

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Capitalism has funny way of determining which products succeed. Many times it isn't the best technology products that win.

Of-course not. Why is that funny? Capitalism shouldn't make the technically best product win. It should make the "capitalistically" best product win.

We are now in a somewhat parallell/similar discussion to the one in the thread about engineering-ness.

"He used to carry his guitar in a gunny sack, or sit beneath the tree by the railroad track. Oh the engineers would see him sitting in the shade, Strumming with the rhythm that the drivers made. People passing by, they would stop and say, "Oh, my, what that little country boy could play!" [Chuck Berry]

 

"Some questions have no answers."[C Baird] "There comes a point where the spoon-feeding has to stop and the independent thinking has to start." [C Lawson] "There are always ways to disagree, without being disagreeable."[E Weddington] "Words represent concepts. Use the wrong words, communicate the wrong concept." [J Morin] "Persistence only goes so far if you set yourself up for failure." [Kartman]

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

smileymicros wrote:
johnwarfin wrote:
I despise the Arduino development platform ...
And this is THE THING - such emotion over a tool. I've noted several folks who generally seem reasoned in their thread responses except when it comes to Arduino, then they get emotive.

Is this emotion being expressed at the IDE or about the chip support library routines (digitalWrite() et al)?

I've seen people say they hate the IDE "because it's written in Java" - like that really matters? The key thing is that the user interface of the IDE provides you all the tools you need in well thought out places. Personally I thought it scored well on this point.

As for the chip support lib - that's all it really is. A "support" lib. For beginners who don't want to get messy with setting up ADCs and such calling some well documented APIs is a much easier choice. No one says that the programmer of an Arduino has to use the library routines. It's just as valid to write:

PORTD |= (1<<PD7);

as it is to use:

digitalWrite(13, HIGH);

The experienced programmer can read the datasheet and see that pin13 on a mega8/88/168 is bit 7 of port D while the beginner can just connect an LED to pin13 and digitalWrite(13) and be happy that it works without needing to know about port bit manipulation.

I'm a great fan of "instant results" to motive beginners (I remember fondly the day I programmed my name into my Butterfly when I first got it!!) and anything that helps them get started seems like a boon to me.

The Lego Mindstorm NXT (based on AVR) is another great way to get children and non-engineers to get interested in programming hardware. In that case it's possibly even easier than Arduino as the programming is a GUI flowchart metaphor. Perhaps Arduino uptake could be even more widespread if they added a flowcharting tool to the Java IDE that had draggable "building blocks"?

Anything that gets youngsters interested in MCUs is great in my book. It'd be interesting to see how Microchip get on with their endeavour too. It might be seen as competition - but any commercial market benefits from competition as it drives up standards and drives down prices. (and anything that hides the awful 8bit PIC architecture from the beginner programmer has got to be a good idea!)

Cliff

PS wonder if those same big-wigs at Microchip who don't understand Arduino have grasped the fact that PIC 8bit does NOT have a GCC port on which to build a system like the Arduino IDE? Presumably they'd have to either write a C compiler or put this on top of a commercial C compiler for PIC (which could have interesting implications for the sales of such a commercial compiler!)

Last Edited: Wed. Jan 6, 2010 - 11:53 AM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I mentioned the Pinguino on another thread a few days ago:

http://www.hackinglab.org/pinguino/index_pinguino.html

An Arduino-like board using a 40 MIPS 16-bit PIC should be very popular, especially as it could have DSP facilities if it used a dsPIC. That would offer all sorts of interesting audio processing effects. It would deliver far more performance than the AVR-powered Arduino - 2x MIPS and 16-bit ones to boot - for about the same price. Perhaps I ought to design one.

Microchip supplies free samples very quickly to anyone who asks for them (in the USA, at any rate), which would reduce the cost still further.

Leon Heller G1HSM

Last Edited: Wed. Jan 6, 2010 - 11:56 AM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Perhaps I ought to design one.

But the "clever bits" of Arduino are arguably the easy to use IDE, the easy to use support lib and the no-nosense, simply works bootloader that glues everything together. The "cost" is in the development of those things - the h/w design is pretty incidental (it's not much more than a raw mega168, a clock circuit and UART interface)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Once the basic hardware is in place that should be forthcoming quite quickly. The 16-bit PICs have all the necessary facilities (including bootloading) and software to create that stuff easily. They are nicer chips to work with than the AVR and XMega, as well as offering far more performance, and Microchip support is much better than Atmel's.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

The 16-bit PICs have all the necessary facilities (including bootloading) and software to create that stuff easily.

A FREE C(++) compiler with an easy to use, multi-platform IDE?

(remember that a lot of "artists" tend to use Mac's rather than PC's so you want a solution that will work there)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

There is a free version of the Microchip compiler, it just lacks some optimisations. Most people use that for development. Geven the chips' very high performance, the restrictions won't matter for the typical Arduino user.

When I visited the prestigious Royal College of Art a couple of years ago, lots of the design students were using Arduinos for their projects, but they were all using PCs. Anyway, a cross-platform version of the software could be produced quite easily using Qt. All the source code is available.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

leon_heller wrote:
PICs have all the necessary facilities (including bootloading) and software to create that stuff easily. They are nicer chips to work with than the AVR

LOL! Spoken by someone who apparently has never seen these instruction sets.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

The 16-bit PICs have a much better architecture and instruction set than the AVR! I've been using AVRs since they first came out, as well as 16-bit PICs. You obviously haven't!

The PICs also have single-cycle 17-bit multiplication, and fast division hardware. The dsPICs have an on-chip DSP engine with 40-bit accumulators.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

leon_heller wrote:
The 16-bit PICs have a much better architecture and instruction set than the AVR! I've been using AVRs since they first came out, as well as 16-bit PICs. You obviously haven't!

The PICs also have single-cycle 17-bit multiplication, and fast division hardware. The dsPICs have an on-chip DSP engine with 40-bit accumulators.

Ahhhh.... my micro can beat up your micro ANY day of the week. :)

How many of those 40 bit accumulators?

I've had to do more PIC and DsPIC asm development than AVR which is one reason I dislike them so much. Now ARM...

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Now ARM...

Agree, given $1 ARMs why bother with pissy little 8 and 16 bit micros anyway? If the support "lib" is going to hide the chip complexity behind the likes of digitalWrite() then give the users more goodies/power for less pennies. Just because Arduino happened to choose an 8bit AVR doesn't mean such generic dev systems have to be tied to 8bit - indeed Leon already moved the goalposts to 16bit anyway so why stop there and not just hop to 32bit if it costs the same or less?

(OTOH I guess this thread is about Microchip's attempt to make an Arduino clone - do they have Cortex M3's yet? In the $1..$2 range?)

PS Do the Atmel SAM3U's really exist in production? If they are in the dollar range then they might make a nice Arduino2!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

johnwarfin wrote:

LOL! Spoken by someone who apparently has never seen these instruction sets.
Exactly. You are the one :D

Quote:
Ahhhh.... my micro can beat up your micro ANY day of the week. :)
OK, let's try.

1. Please show the fastest Mega uitoa code and I will show my dsPIC uitoa code which executes in 21 cycles (0.5 uS @40 MIPS) and occupies 13 program memory words.

2. Please show the fastest Mega incremental sinewave generator code (not using a sinewave table) and I will show my dsPIC incremental sinewave generator code which executes in 13 cycles (0.27 uS @40 MIPS) and occupies 10 program memory words.

3. Write the fastest and shortest Mega code which does a single FIR tap as follows:

1. Fetch a data sample from memory.
2. Fetch a filter coefficient for this sample.
3. Perform a multiplication of the data to a coefficient.
4. Add this result to the previously calculated result.
5. Advance a data sample pointer.
6. Advance a coefficient pointer.
7. Round the calculated result.
8. Store a rounded result to memory.
9. Service a circular data buffer checking and adjusting its bounds in memory.

When completed, compare it with this dsPIC single cycle (25 ns @40 MIPS) single word instruction which does exactly the same:

mac w4*w5,A,[w8]+=2,w4,[w10]+=2,w5,w13

Desperately waiting :D :D :D

Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

MBedder wrote:
1. Please show the fastest Mega uitoa code and I will show my dsPIC uitoa code which executes in 21 cycles (0.5 uS @40 MIPS) and occupies 13 program memory words.

2. Please show the fastest Mega incremental sinewave generator code (not using a sinewave table) and I will show my dsPIC incremental sinewave generator code which executes in 13 cycles (0.27 uS @40 MIPS) and occupies 10 program memory words.

3. Write the fastest and shortest Mega code which does a single FIR tap as follows:

1. Fetch a data sample from memory.
2. Fetch a filter coefficient for this sample.
3. Perform a multiplication of the data to a coefficient.
4. Add this result to the previously calculated result.
5. Advance a data sample pointer.
6. Advance a coefficient pointer.
7. Round the calculated result.
8. Store a rounded result to memory.
9. Service a circular data buffer checking and adjusting its bounds in memory.

When completed, compare it with this dsPIC single cycle (25 ns @40 MIPS) single word instruction which does exactly the same:

mac w4*w5,A,[w8]+=2,w4,[w10]+=2,w5,w13

Desperately waiting :D :D :D

LOL! Yeah... Right! I'm afraid you will have to find somebody else to dance for you. Those who have written assembler ("real men") for AVR, DsPIC, and ARM know the truth.

I have a much more reasonable challenge, turn on an LED. Here's code from another thread:

sbi DDRB,0

If you can produce a smaller program I'll eat my hat! :)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Here you are:

clr TRISB

This single word instruction lights 16 LEDs at once so you have to eat 16 hats.
Bon appetit! :D :D :D

Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

MBedder wrote:
Here you are:

clr TRISB

This single word instruction lights 16 LEDs at once so you have to eat 16 hats.
Bon appetit! :D :D :D

First your program fails to "TURN ON AN LED". Secondly it's not smaller than mine.

YOU LOSE! :)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

My program configures all 16 PORTB pins as outputs which immediately makes PORTB to emit active '0' levels to all its 16 pins. Eat, do not boggle :D :D :D

Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

clawson wrote:
Quote:

Now ARM...

Agree, given $1 ARMs why bother with pissy little 8 and 16 bit micros anyway? If the support "lib" is going to hide the chip complexity behind the likes of digitalWrite() then give the users more goodies/power for less pennies. Just because Arduino happened to choose an 8bit AVR doesn't mean such generic dev systems have to be tied to 8bit - indeed Leon already moved the goalposts to 16bit anyway so why stop there and not just hop to 32bit if it costs the same or less?

(OTOH I guess this thread is about Microchip's attempt to make an Arduino clone - do they have Cortex M3's yet? In the $1..$2 range?)

PS Do the Atmel SAM3U's really exist in production? If they are in the dollar range then they might make a nice Arduino2!

Microchip has the MIPS-based PIC32. It has some advantages over the ARM, and pricing is about the same for chips with similar performance and features. They also have the nice feature of being pin-compatible with many of the 16-bit PICs, and use the same IDE and development hardware. I use ARMs and find it a bit of nuisance having to use a different IDE and debugging hardware with them, although the excellent Rowley tools makes up for it.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

The pro-PIC arguments on this thread are another great indicator why the Arduino is eating their lunch in this market. Not a single word stated pro-PIC has anything whatsoever to do with why the Arduino is so popular. It is that cluelessness that will assure the Arduino's continued ascendancy. Yeah, a 16-bit dsPIC(able) beats an 8-bit ATmega on some things, and a 32-bit ARM beats 'em both, but nothing could possible be of less interest to the folks flocking to Arduino.

If you can put together a dsPIC(able) system that you can hand to an artist/designer who wants to make a coffee percolator prototype (and is far more interested in the penis-ness of the spout than the MIPs of the processor) and in 3 hours can have him reading buttons, lighting LEDs, reading a temperature sensor and turning the heating coils on and off -- then you have a chance to compete with the Arduino. This is precisely the environment in which the Arduino evolved and it is the lack of experience with and snotty attitude toward the folks that the system was designed for that IMHO will prevent any serious competitor from showing up any time soon.

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

johnwarfin wrote:
leon_heller wrote:
The 16-bit PICs have a much better architecture and instruction set than the AVR! I've been using AVRs since they first came out, as well as 16-bit PICs. You obviously haven't!

The PICs also have single-cycle 17-bit multiplication, and fast division hardware. The dsPICs have an on-chip DSP engine with 40-bit accumulators.

Ahhhh.... my micro can beat up your micro ANY day of the week. :)

How many of those 40 bit accumulators?

I've had to do more PIC and DsPIC asm development than AVR which is one reason I dislike them so much. Now ARM...

Have you really used dsPICs? See the following:

High-Performance DSC CPU:
• Modified Harvard architecture
• C compiler optimized instruction set
• 16-bit wide data path
• 24-bit wide instructions
• Linear program memory addressing up to 4M
instruction words
• Linear data memory addressing up to 64 Kbytes
• 83 base instructions: mostly 1 word/1 cycle
• Two 40-bit accumulators with rounding and
saturation options
• Flexible and powerful addressing modes:
- Indirect
- Modulo
- Bit-Reversed
• Software stack
• 16 x 16 fractional/integer multiply operations
• 32/16 and 16/16 divide operations
• Single-cycle multiply and accumulate:
- Accumulator write back for DSP operations
- Dual data fetch
• Up to ±16-bit shifts for up to 40-bit data

They do make Atmel's offerings look a bit sick!

Leon

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

leon_heller wrote:
They do make Atmel's offerings look a bit sick!

Leon

Do you have any idea what this thread is about? Do you care at all?

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

smileymicros wrote:
The pro-PIC arguments on this thread...
No pro-PICing, just a pure anti-LAMEing :D

Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.

Last Edited: Wed. Jan 6, 2010 - 03:47 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

smileymicros wrote:
The pro-PIC arguments on this thread are another great indicator why the Arduino is eating their lunch in this market. Not a single word stated pro-PIC has anything whatsoever to do with why the Arduino is so popular. It is that cluelessness that will assure the Arduino's continued ascendancy. Yeah, a 16-bit dsPIC(able) beats an 8-bit ATmega on some things, and a 32-bit ARM beats 'em both, but nothing could possible be of less interest to the folks flocking to Arduino.

If you can put together a dsPIC(able) system that you can hand to an artist/designer who wants to make a coffee percolator prototype (and is far more interested in the penis-ness of the spout than the MIPs of the processor) and in 3 hours can have him reading buttons, lighting LEDs, reading a temperature sensor and turning the heating coils on and off -- then you have a chance to compete with the Arduino. This is precisely the environment in which the Arduino evolved and it is the lack of experience with and snotty attitude toward the folks that the system was designed for that IMHO will prevent any serious competitor from showing up any time soon.

Smiley

You can do all that sort of stuff very quickly with the 8-bit 18F and 16-bit PICs, because of the extensive peripheral libraries that are available. It would be nice if Atmel did something similar for the AVR, it would save developers a lot of time and effort.

A 32-bit ARM won't do DSP operations as fast as a dsPIC.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

MBedder wrote:
smileymicros wrote:
The pro-PIC arguments on this thread...
No pro-PICing, just pure anti-LAMEING :D
And a profound lack of understanding about the OP or the value of a system like the Arduino. Pure hijacking if you ask me.

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

All this IDE, development board, library nonsense should be banned.

A beginner should be locked in a windowless room and provided with only the following:

- An AVRISP MkII
- A PC with only AVR Studio (no GCC), Adobe Reader and set of AVR datasheets and app notes installed. No Internet connection!
- A breadboard
- An ATmega168
- A power supply
- A few passive components, I2C chips, an LCD module and a length of wire.
- A glass of water (because I'm not that cruel).

They should then not be allowed out of the room until they have mastered the use of all provided components and at least 4 peripherals on the ATmega168!

Perhaps it is best that I am not in the education business.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Adobe Reader and set of AVR datasheets and app notes installed

To be fair I think I'd include the opcode manual in that ;-)

PS I love "dsPic(able)"! :lol:

Last Edited: Wed. Jan 6, 2010 - 03:55 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

leon_heller wrote:
You can do all that sort of stuff very quickly with the 8-bit 18F and 16-bit PICs, because of the extensive peripheral libraries that are available. It would be nice if Atmel did something similar for the AVR, it would save developers a lot of time and effort.

A 32-bit ARM won't do DSP operations as fast as a dsPIC.

The key point here is 'could'. Sort of coulda, shoulda, woulda BUT din't didja? You are all talk all the time and not a single bit of show. If you spent half the time working on your PIC based Arduino killer that you do advertising the virtues of the PIC, then you might have something to show. Your talk is never coming to anything other than wannabee babble. Where are your systems that are competing in this market? Where is your 'anything' but talk?

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Microchip is number one in 8-bit MCUs and Atmel is fifth, I think that speaks for itself.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Microchip is number one in 8-bit MCUs and Atmel is fifth, I think that speaks for itself.

Then why are they worried about the uptake of Arduino that is educating future engineers to use AVRs in their designs?

Or is "resting on your laurels" a good business plan? Where is Zilog these days? They once virtually owned the 8bit micro market.

Last Edited: Wed. Jan 6, 2010 - 03:59 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

MattBucknall wrote:
All this IDE, development board, library nonsense should be banned.

A beginner should be locked in a windowless room and provided with only the following:

- An AVRISP MkII
- A PC with only AVR Studio (no GCC), Adobe Reader and set of AVR datasheets and app notes installed. No Internet connection!
- A breadboard
- An ATmega168
- A power supply
- A few passive components, I2C chips, an LCD module and a length of wire.
- A glass of water (because I'm not that cruel).

They should then not be allowed out of the room until they have mastered the use of all provided components and at least 4 peripherals on the ATmega168!

Perhaps it is best that I am not in the education business.

My presumption is that this is irony, but with some of the silliness I've seen of late, you could be serious. Are you?

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

smileymicros wrote:
leon_heller wrote:
They do make Atmel's offerings look a bit sick!

Leon

Do you have any idea what this thread is about? Do you care at all?

Smiley

I was merely correcting someone who claimed to have used the dsPIC, who didn't seem to know that the DSP engine had two accumulators. What is wrong with that?

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

you could be serious. Are you?

There's an argument that this strategy would sort the wheat from the chaff! ;-)

(but to really mix it up don't give them the AVRISPmkII either and that will filter out the REALLY good engineers!)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

leon_heller wrote:
Microchip is number one in 8-bit MCUs and Atmel is fifth, I think that speaks for itself.
It says less about the Arduino - which is the topic of this thread that you are hijacking - than your lack of product says about you. Show us something that competes with the Arduino or quit trying to distract folks from the original post.

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I already have - the Pinguino. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar with a 16-bit PIC was available before long.

Look at the title of this thread "Arduino envy at Microchip". It's about PICs and Arduinos, or have I got it wrong?

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

clawson wrote:
Quote:

you could be serious. Are you?

There's an argument that this strategy would sort the wheat from the chaff! ;-)

(but to really mix it up don't give them the AVRISPmkII either and that will filter out the REALLY good engineers!)

So now Arduino users are chaff? I would have expected you to be less judgmental about folks just starting out. I would even bet that some mentor along the line was quite patient with you when you were in that chaff stage of your development.

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Is the arduino wiring program open source? I gather it generates gcc c source that gets compiled and bootloaded. I guess there's a bunch of init-the-mega328-peripherals subroutines in there that would have to be ported to the new different target cpu, but if there's a gcc compiler for it, its all good right? Someone could have a tms430 or a hc12 arduino running Real Quick right?

Imagecraft compiler user

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Good point - those who participate in this thread but do not glorify Saint Arduino are just hijackers. Shouldn't we sing out loud the panegyric to Arduino to atone for this mortal sin? :D :D :D

Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

leon_heller wrote:
I already have - the Pinguino. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar with a 16-bit PIC was available before long.

Look at the title of this thread "Arduino envy at Microchip". It's about PICs and Arduinos, or have I got it wrong?

Of course you've got it wrong. You always have it wrong. It is about Microchip wanting somehting to compete with the Arduino. Try reading the OP again, slower this time.

Oh, I didn't realize that the Pinguino was your product. And how does the market for your Pinguino compare to the market for Arduino?

Smiley

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

bobgardner wrote:
Is the arduino wiring program open source? I gather it generates gcc c source that gets compiled and bootloaded. I guess there's a bunch of init-the-mega328-peripherals subroutines in there that would have to be ported to the new different target cpu, but if there's a gcc compiler for it, its all good right? Someone could have a tms430 or a hc12 arduino running Real Quick right?

That's why I thought that a 16-bit PIC version should be quite straightforward, Microchip uses the gcc compiler.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

smileymicros wrote:
leon_heller wrote:
I already have - the Pinguino. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar with a 16-bit PIC was available before long.

Look at the title of this thread "Arduino envy at Microchip". It's about PICs and Arduinos, or have I got it wrong?

Of course you've got it wrong. You always have it wrong. It is about Microchip wanting somehting to compete with the Arduino. Try reading the OP again, slower this time.

Oh, I didn't realize that the Pinguino was your product. And how does the market for your Pinguino compare to the market for Arduino?

Smiley

I haven't a clue! Is anyone interested?

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

bobgardner wrote:
Is the arduino wiring program open source? I gather it generates gcc c source that gets compiled and bootloaded. I guess there's a bunch of init-the-mega328-peripherals subroutines in there that would have to be ported to the new different target cpu, but if there's a gcc compiler for it, its all good right? Someone could have a tms430 or a hc12 arduino running Real Quick right?
It is all open source and it uses GCC and AVRDude.

Smiley

Pages